诊断儿童焦虑症时心理健康与非心理健康临床医生专业词汇使用模式的比较

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS
Journal of Pediatrics Pub Date : 2025-11-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-18 DOI:10.1016/j.jpeds.2025.114735
Mayanka Chandrashekar, Jordan Tschida, Jeffrey R Strawn, Heidi A Hanson, Daniel Santel, Ian Goethert, Anuj J Kapadia, Tracy Glauser, John Pestian, Greeshma A Agasthya
{"title":"诊断儿童焦虑症时心理健康与非心理健康临床医生专业词汇使用模式的比较","authors":"Mayanka Chandrashekar, Jordan Tschida, Jeffrey R Strawn, Heidi A Hanson, Daniel Santel, Ian Goethert, Anuj J Kapadia, Tracy Glauser, John Pestian, Greeshma A Agasthya","doi":"10.1016/j.jpeds.2025.114735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the utilization patterns of expert vocabulary (EVo) in diagnosing pediatric anxiety between mental health and non-mental health clinical notes from electronic health records to understand the role of Evo in informing classification and decision-making in anxiety diagnoses.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We conducted a retrospective study using a cohort less than age 25 from Cincinnati Children's Hospital including 897 685 patients with 61 586 446 notes. We analyzed EVo, collected from mental health clinicians, in both mental and nonmental health notes. We compared classification accuracy using EVo-based patient-level embedding from all clinical notes, mental-health notes, and nonmental health notes for 2 tasks: 1) pre-vs postdiagnosis anxiety patients, and 2) prediagnosis anxiety vs nonanxiety patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EVo usage was highest in prediagnosis anxiety, lower in nonanxiety, and lowest in post-diagnosis. Classification models using EVo features from all, mental-health, and non-mental health notes showed similar F1 scores for prediagnosis anxiety (0.70 ± 0.2 for 2 categories). For anxiety vs nonanxiety classification, all clinical and nonmental health notes had better F1 scores than mental-health notes (above 0.90 for 3 categories). There was a notable difference in class-wise performance across both tasks.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There are significant differences in anxiety EVo use between mental health and nonmental health clinicians. Despite less anxiety-specific terminology, non-mental health notes still captured key aspects of patient presentations, emphasizing the importance of including all clinicians' notes in analysis. EVo's utility for anxiety classification is most effective in prediagnostic phases, suggesting the need for a dedicated diagnostic lexicon and further study before incorporating EVo into classification models.</p>","PeriodicalId":54774,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"114735"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Expert Vocabulary Usage Patterns Between Mental Health and Nonmental Health Clinicians When Diagnosing Pediatric Anxiety Disorders.\",\"authors\":\"Mayanka Chandrashekar, Jordan Tschida, Jeffrey R Strawn, Heidi A Hanson, Daniel Santel, Ian Goethert, Anuj J Kapadia, Tracy Glauser, John Pestian, Greeshma A Agasthya\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jpeds.2025.114735\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the utilization patterns of expert vocabulary (EVo) in diagnosing pediatric anxiety between mental health and non-mental health clinical notes from electronic health records to understand the role of Evo in informing classification and decision-making in anxiety diagnoses.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We conducted a retrospective study using a cohort less than age 25 from Cincinnati Children's Hospital including 897 685 patients with 61 586 446 notes. We analyzed EVo, collected from mental health clinicians, in both mental and nonmental health notes. We compared classification accuracy using EVo-based patient-level embedding from all clinical notes, mental-health notes, and nonmental health notes for 2 tasks: 1) pre-vs postdiagnosis anxiety patients, and 2) prediagnosis anxiety vs nonanxiety patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EVo usage was highest in prediagnosis anxiety, lower in nonanxiety, and lowest in post-diagnosis. Classification models using EVo features from all, mental-health, and non-mental health notes showed similar F1 scores for prediagnosis anxiety (0.70 ± 0.2 for 2 categories). For anxiety vs nonanxiety classification, all clinical and nonmental health notes had better F1 scores than mental-health notes (above 0.90 for 3 categories). There was a notable difference in class-wise performance across both tasks.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There are significant differences in anxiety EVo use between mental health and nonmental health clinicians. Despite less anxiety-specific terminology, non-mental health notes still captured key aspects of patient presentations, emphasizing the importance of including all clinicians' notes in analysis. EVo's utility for anxiety classification is most effective in prediagnostic phases, suggesting the need for a dedicated diagnostic lexicon and further study before incorporating EVo into classification models.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54774,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pediatrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"114735\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2025.114735\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2025.114735","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较心理健康和非心理健康电子病历中专家词汇(EVo)在诊断儿童焦虑中的使用情况,了解专家词汇在焦虑诊断分类和决策中的作用。研究设计:我们对来自辛辛那提儿童医院的年龄小于25岁的队列进行了回顾性研究,包括897,685例患者,61,586,446条记录。我们分析了从心理健康临床医生收集的EVo,包括心理和非心理健康记录。我们比较了基于evo的患者水平嵌入的分类准确性,这些嵌入来自所有临床记录、心理健康记录和非心理健康记录,用于两个任务:1)诊断前与诊断后的焦虑患者,2)诊断前的焦虑患者与非焦虑患者。结果:EVo使用率在诊断前焦虑组最高,非焦虑组较低,诊断后最低。使用所有、心理健康和非心理健康记录的EVo特征的分类模型显示,诊断前焦虑的F1得分相似(两类为0.70±0.2)。对于焦虑与非焦虑分类,所有临床和非心理健康记录的F1得分都高于心理健康记录(三个类别均高于0.90)。在这两项任务中,班级表现有显著差异。结论:心理健康和非心理健康的临床医生在焦虑性EVo使用方面存在显著差异。尽管焦虑相关的术语较少,但非精神健康笔记仍然抓住了患者陈述的关键方面,强调了在分析中包括所有临床医生笔记的重要性。EVo对焦虑分类的效用在诊断前阶段最为有效,这表明在将EVo纳入分类模型之前,需要专门的诊断词典和进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Expert Vocabulary Usage Patterns Between Mental Health and Nonmental Health Clinicians When Diagnosing Pediatric Anxiety Disorders.

Objective: To compare the utilization patterns of expert vocabulary (EVo) in diagnosing pediatric anxiety between mental health and non-mental health clinical notes from electronic health records to understand the role of Evo in informing classification and decision-making in anxiety diagnoses.

Study design: We conducted a retrospective study using a cohort less than age 25 from Cincinnati Children's Hospital including 897 685 patients with 61 586 446 notes. We analyzed EVo, collected from mental health clinicians, in both mental and nonmental health notes. We compared classification accuracy using EVo-based patient-level embedding from all clinical notes, mental-health notes, and nonmental health notes for 2 tasks: 1) pre-vs postdiagnosis anxiety patients, and 2) prediagnosis anxiety vs nonanxiety patients.

Results: EVo usage was highest in prediagnosis anxiety, lower in nonanxiety, and lowest in post-diagnosis. Classification models using EVo features from all, mental-health, and non-mental health notes showed similar F1 scores for prediagnosis anxiety (0.70 ± 0.2 for 2 categories). For anxiety vs nonanxiety classification, all clinical and nonmental health notes had better F1 scores than mental-health notes (above 0.90 for 3 categories). There was a notable difference in class-wise performance across both tasks.

Conclusions: There are significant differences in anxiety EVo use between mental health and nonmental health clinicians. Despite less anxiety-specific terminology, non-mental health notes still captured key aspects of patient presentations, emphasizing the importance of including all clinicians' notes in analysis. EVo's utility for anxiety classification is most effective in prediagnostic phases, suggesting the need for a dedicated diagnostic lexicon and further study before incorporating EVo into classification models.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pediatrics
Journal of Pediatrics 医学-小儿科
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.00%
发文量
696
审稿时长
31 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pediatrics is an international peer-reviewed journal that advances pediatric research and serves as a practical guide for pediatricians who manage health and diagnose and treat disorders in infants, children, and adolescents. The Journal publishes original work based on standards of excellence and expert review. The Journal seeks to publish high quality original articles that are immediately applicable to practice (basic science, translational research, evidence-based medicine), brief clinical and laboratory case reports, medical progress, expert commentary, grand rounds, insightful editorials, “classic” physical examinations, and novel insights into clinical and academic pediatric medicine related to every aspect of child health. Published monthly since 1932, The Journal of Pediatrics continues to promote the latest developments in pediatric medicine, child health, policy, and advocacy. Topics covered in The Journal of Pediatrics include, but are not limited to: General Pediatrics Pediatric Subspecialties Adolescent Medicine Allergy and Immunology Cardiology Critical Care Medicine Developmental-Behavioral Medicine Endocrinology Gastroenterology Hematology-Oncology Infectious Diseases Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Emergency Medicine Pulmonology Rheumatology Genetics Ethics Health Service Research Pediatric Hospitalist Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信